Unregistered, as a new member your first 5 posts will be subject to moderation.
So if your post is submitted successfully, but does not show up immediately, please be patient, as it may take some time for a moderator to approve it.
Please don't double post.

No one has been slinging insults back and forth at anyone. People are having a discussion, a large part of which centered on asking for clarification because the questions and/or intent was not clear to most of us. That is all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nycindie as said above

Do you have a learning disability? Maybe that's why so many of your discussions get caught up in everyone trying to figure out what you're trying to say

I disagree. I think it's a valid question when someone is having recurring difficulty in making themselves understood in a text environment. My assumption was that the issues were perhaps the result of English not being the posters first language. If there is an underlying reason behind the problem and others involved in the conversation are aware of that reason then we'll be able to work around it. Otherwise the poster in question is doomed to a circle of continual misunderstanding.

I would never have thought that asking someone if they have a learning disability is an insult. My friends with learning disabilities would be insulted that you think that's an insult!

I did say "Just asking my next question out of curiosity, not judgment" and "it might help us understand you." I thought it obvious that I was not directing an insult at anyone and was trying only to get clarity.

I was sensitive to the fact that a member wasn't getting across her ideas and wanted to see if there was another way we could be brought to an understanding of what she was trying to say. Nothing insulting about it. If that isn't being compassionately curious and trying to help, then maybe we're in different universes right now.

I apologize to Flowerchild and anyone else who may have felt insulted. That was not my intent. I was seeking only to bring us all closer to understanding each other. Apparently there is a communication issue and my words were not clear. I will not contribute to this thread any further.

An observation: It might help to reduce your writing to simpler terms and easier concepts. You're dealing with a mixed audience of various perspectives and language patterns, so clarity is a must if you'd like useful thought exchanges. While I think the previous post to mine was a bit rude, I think the point is that this topic doesn't require such complexity or carefully crafted speech. Keep it simple, right?

I think Flowerchild is just trying to be nice, and not call people out on their hypocritical behavior, so what he/she is doing is trying to get people to understand why it isn't OK to label someone a Cowboy/Cowgirl and become involved in their life to the point of interfering.

I've never met any non-monogamous people in my life who didn't cross lines between involvement and into interfering (whether it was from a poly or BDSM standpoint was irrelevant as both sets definitely crossed lines into interfering) and there were times when the person in question was not a Cowboy/Cowgirl

So it's hard for me to believe that the problems with this thread are people honestly being confused, as opposed to moving the spotlight to a more convenient area to illuminate

Quote:

Well, you just called some of the most respectable people on this site trolls. Good luck having future discussions if that's your perspective.

this was actually the only "semantics" problem this thread actually had, as troll is misusing the word beyond the parameters of "language fluidity" but in FC's defense, is there a word in any language's lexicon that describes a blogger who talks the talk yet is guilty of the very behavior they openly preach against and thus fail to walk the walk?

Is there a word for not wanting to preform the tasks of a responsible adult, to want to take a day of childish fingers in the ears and "bla-bla-blah!!" all the unpleasant behavior that you don't wish to deal with, don't want others talking about it either, yet maintain the adult badge of character who doesn't need to stick their head in the sand?

troll? probably not, so I guess FC should have just hyphenated the above two paragraphs and called it a word

if anybody on the forum can't handle a discussion without resorting to shutting down the conversation -- regardless of their status -- does that mean the entire board needs to cease and desist because of one or two individuals that cannot handle the topic?

It's not wrong to not want to discuss a topic that people would rather sweep under the rug, it's just that if someone can't handle discussing it honestly then they should not. It's extremely immature to not want it discussed, then when it is join the conversation in attempt to silence one side of the fence or pretend not to understand the light being shed regarding the topic.

I understand the common tactics used to divert attention away from the unflattering points, to end the thread on a note which sounds as if the entire discussion was plagued by misunderstanding and thus ultimately voided. I am not saying it's wrong, but rather questioning if such a route is seriously the best chosen path.

Nobody can force others to engage in an adult discussion, especially about subjects that are not easy to talk about, esp when they mean taking a look at your own behavior, but there too, you can't force others to decide not to tackle the hard topics just because another person doesn't want to.

Even if the problem could be spun into a semantics, fluidity of language issue -- even if that could be done convincingly -- is that really the best decision?

As long as YOUR partner respects your relationship there's sfa anyone who's in a relationship with them can do about it. I trust my partners to do what is best for them and to be kind to me in the process. If someone is going to rope them away then I'm afraid they want to be roped. My partners are fully developed adults who are going to make their own decisions (which sometimes may not be the choices I prefer).

First, I believe I should be aware if Hubby or S2 is seeing someone else, and I would like to at least know that person's name. If she were important enough for the guy to start a relationship with, and she made him happy, that's something I would want to share with him. I wouldn't necessarily push to *meet* her, but I would want to at least have some clue who this other important person is. (Her name is X, she's Y years old, she has or doesn't have kids, etc.)

On the other hand, if either of them were seeing someone else, *he* would probably want me to meet her, just as I wanted Hubby and S2 to meet each other once it became apparent that S2 and I had more of a relationship than the FWB arrangement we started off with. I made it clear to both of them that their meeting was my preference, but was entirely *their* choice. They chose to meet, because of what I said above; each of them is someone very important in my life, and each of them wanted to know who the other important person was.

That's how we do it and what works for us; other people poly differently, and that's cool if it works for them.

If Hubby or S2 were seeing someone else, and I suspected that person was trying to drive a wedge between the guy and me, I would speak up. Not to the other woman, but to the guy. And it wouldn't be so much "I think she's trying to drive a wedge between us" as "I'm concerned about this aspect of *our* relationship that seems to have changed since you started seeing her." I wouldn't say "You have to stop seeing her" or issue ultimatums; but I would express that I was worried and why.

To me, I would have more "right" to do that with Hubby than with S2, because Hubby and I are legally married, cohabitate, parent Alt and Country together, etc. Hubby supports me financially as well as emotionally. I have a lot more to lose if the marriage disintegrates than I do if my relationship with S2 falls apart.

Likewise, if, for example, Hubby started to feel like S2 was trying to get me all to himself, I would want him to say something to me about it.

I know I care. That was a huge issue Ive had with a couple people nate dated. Seems to me they didn't respect my marriage so they had to go. I will not tolerate that.

It's kinda crazy to think that my partner would ever date someone who objected to being with me, but aren't cowboys and cowgirls actively trying to break up other relationships? Cuz I can tell you right now that anyone who did that would never get kicked out the door by me; he'd do it before I had a chance. Same with me. Anyone who tried to get me to leave my guy would be gone.

he'd do it before I had a chance. Same with me. Anyone who tried to get me to leave my guy would be gone.

Unfortunately, it's not uncommon for the person involved in the relationship to be blind to the more subtle attempts at sabotage many of these cowgirls/cowboys do, especially when they are all caught up in NRE. It's not always so obvious as the new partner simply asking them to leave the other partner. I've seen it happen here, where neither party recognizes the signs until someone here on the board mentions it.